I think your subtle focus on the semantics of the reply highlight a common block to agile feedback loops, small batches and generally getting things done. Sorry if that's harsh but you either missed the point of the article entirely or just overlooked it, the latter possibly being worse.
The primary point IMO is "don't squash ownership" because the cost of doing so is often not fully realised.
The secondary point is "don't sweat the details". You've kinda proven you don't get this yet.
> I think your subtle focus on the semantics of the reply highlight a common block to agile feedback loops, small batches and generally getting things done. The primary point IMO is "don't squash ownership" because the cost of doing so is often not fully realised.
^^^ Here's your comment without the pointless condescending remarks. Notice the difference?
The primary point IMO is "don't squash ownership" because the cost of doing so is often not fully realised. The secondary point is "don't sweat the details". You've kinda proven you don't get this yet.